MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404994124 · doi:10.3390/machines12120872

Comparing Skill Transfer Between Full Demonstrations and Segmented Sub-Tasks for Neural Dynamic Motion Primitives

2024· article· en· W4404994124 on OpenAlex
Geoffrey Hanks, Gentiane Venture, Yue Hu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMachines · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Task (project management)Computer scienceMotion (physics)Artificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceRobotProgramming by demonstrationMachine learningHuman–computer interactionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Programming by demonstration has shown potential in reducing the technical barriers to teaching complex skills to robots. Dynamic motion primitives (DMPs) are an efficient method of learning trajectories from individual demonstrations using second-order dynamic equations. They can be expanded using neural networks to learn longer and more complex skills. However, the length and complexity of a skill may come with trade-offs in terms of accuracy, the time required by experts, and task flexibility. This paper compares neural DMPs that learn from a full demonstration to those that learn from simpler sub-tasks for a pouring scenario in a framework that requires few demonstrations. While both methods were successful in completing the task, we find that the models trained using sub-tasks are more accurate and have more task flexibility but can require a larger investment from the human expert.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it